Comments on: The Anti-Lessig Reader Wikihttp://www.lessig.org/2006/01/the-antilessig-reader-wiki/
Blog, news, booksTue, 03 Mar 2015 08:01:55 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.2By: Patrick R Sweeneyhttp://www.lessig.org/2006/01/the-antilessig-reader-wiki/#comment-17664
Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:04:06 +0000http://lessig.org/blog/2006/01/the_antilessig_reader_wiki.html#comment-17664This may sound more critical than it is meant to be. It is not my intention to troll, but I think there is a certain hubris in this which begs a few obvious notes.

1. This divides the discussion into Lessig and Anti-Lessig, which seems myopic. It doesn’t seem like the starting point for a well-rounded discussion.

2. You have framed the anti-Lessig discussion.

OK – so that takes care of the low hanging fruit. If we can skip the who’s a fanboy/who’s a troll discussions that would be great. I’m here because I find professor lessig’s blog interesting and entertaining.

Now here’s the one I really question.

3. If someone’s views are truly anti-Lessig, and they get over the first two points, how likely are they to contribute their work under a Creative Commons license?

]]>By: Pablohttp://www.lessig.org/2006/01/the-antilessig-reader-wiki/#comment-17663
Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:00:49 +0000http://lessig.org/blog/2006/01/the_antilessig_reader_wiki.html#comment-17663Your colleague, Professor Goldstein, went on record recently to say “The single greatest error that the popular media and some commentators make is to buy into the notion that copyright is capable of conferring a monopoly over ideas. Copyright law will not – in any context or in any country-extend its protection to ideas; ideas are under the law always free for all to use.”

Does Professor Goldstein consider Free Culture to be among the mistaken commentaries?

The U.S. copyright law has an exemption for people with
disabilities. See Section 121. Although some authors
are complaining about receiving no royalty from copies
as allowed by Section 121, nobody is challenging the
law under equal protection.

perhaps a blanket immunity for widows and orphans might be written into copyright law?

but then you would be discriminating on the basis of marital and parental status – and maybe even sexual orientation since state laws against gay marriage would exclude gays and lesbians from the copyright exemption.

then the american non-widows and non-orphans liberty union would challenge the law under equal protection… and where would this get you?

maybe the best idea is to make the law apply to everyone equally and not use the sympathetic infrigner as rhetorical hyperbole against a nominally good law.

]]>By: lessighttp://www.lessig.org/2006/01/the-antilessig-reader-wiki/#comment-17660
Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:16:29 +0000http://lessig.org/blog/2006/01/the_antilessig_reader_wiki.html#comment-17660Not limited to Free Culture, and more distilled in its criticism.
]]>By: Branko Collinhttp://www.lessig.org/2006/01/the-antilessig-reader-wiki/#comment-17659
Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:56:47 +0000http://lessig.org/blog/2006/01/the_antilessig_reader_wiki.html#comment-17659How is this different from the Free Culture wiki?
]]>By: Seth Finkelsteinhttp://www.lessig.org/2006/01/the-antilessig-reader-wiki/#comment-17658
Sat, 21 Jan 2006 04:11:56 +0000http://lessig.org/blog/2006/01/the_antilessig_reader_wiki.html#comment-17658Just get the MPAA or RIAA to assign it as a project for an intern

There’s got to be plenty of lawyer-larva who would be interested in the assignment :-).
(gotta beat suing widows and orphans)